msw2

1. MSW2/FT2/BSc4 Evidence-based practice Secure accommodation Mark Smith 17th Oct 2006

3. History of secure accommodation Welfare roots Increasingly conceptualised within criminal justice Approved/List D schools Rossie and subsequent expansion No legal basis for placements Growing awareness of human rights Development of criteria

4. The legal framework HASSASSAA 1983 (amending SW (Scot) Act 1968) Criteria he (sic) has a history of absconding and he is likely to abscond unless he is kept in secure accommodation and if he absconds, it is likely that his physical, mental or moral welfare will be at risk:or he is likely to injure himself or other persons unless he is kept in secure accommodation. Best interests Permissive, requiring agreement of chief social work officer and head of establishment Hearing merely provides legal authority

5. The Code of Practice 1985 the use of secure accommodation for children is seen as an exceptional measure: only those children who genuinely need secure accommodation are placed and kept there; where it proves necessary to use this type of accommodation, the length of time during which any child stays in it is restricted to the minimum necessary to meet the child’s particular needs; and the use of secure accommodation is seen in the context of an appropriate child care framework which is fully consistent with the ‘welfare principle’ contained in sections 20 and 43(1) of the Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968

6. Children (Scotland) Act 1995 Leaves criteria largely unchanged (Section 70(10) CSA Guidance (vol 2) maintains ‘best interests’ principle Focus on individual rights Introduces ideas of community interest Secure Remedy 1996 last resort and shortest possible time (3 monthly reviews) Locates secure within wider child care system

7. Admission through the courts; Criminal Procedure Act 1995 Remand; section 51(1) Sentences Summary procedure; section 44(1) Criteria need to be met, welfare principle applies Solemn procedure; sections 205/208 Determinate length of sentence

8. The secure estate Rossie (Montrose) St Mary’s (Bishopbriggs) Kerelaw St. Katharines/Howdenhall (Edinburgh) The Elms (Dundee) St Philips (Plains) Good Shepherd (Bishopton) Kibble (Paisley)

9. The changing discourse on youth crime From welfare to justice Neo-liberal/individual responsibility ‘what works’ Advisory group on youth crime 1999 10 point action plan 2002 Fast-track hearings Youth court pilot ASBOs for under 16s National standards for youth justice (issued Dec 2002) Growth of youth justice teams/projects

10. National standards and secure accommodation Objective 5; to ‘target the use of secure accommodation appropriately and ensure it is effective in reducing offending behaviour’ All relevant background information, including the ASSET/YLS-CMI assessment, held on the young person should be passed by the young person’s caseworker to the secure unit within two working days of admission.

11. The expansion of secure accommodation Secure Remedy 1996 Secure Accommodation Advisory Group 2002 Press release 2002 announces increase in beds from 96 to 125 Justified in terms of response to‘persistent young offenders’ Figures based on panel authorisations not acted on

12. Trends in usage Demand fairly static since late 90s - reducing this year Longer stays (linked to programmes and risk aversion) Boys/girls 76% boys in 2006 Admissions direct from home (33%) International comparisons (4x that of France, 10x that of Spain, 100x that of Finland - Pitts, 2005) Caveats re comparisons

13. Secure accommodation in the continuum of care The Scottish research confirms other findings that the demand for security reflects the requirements of inadequate, open institutions and community services rather than the needs of difficult children. (Kendrick & Fraser, 1992, p. 105) Poorly run children’s homes throw up more candidates for secure than well-run homes Fast track hearing research/persistent young offenders Availability is biggest determinant of usage Laws of supply and demand are inverted

14. Exercise Read the vignettes used for the Secure accommodation research (SE, 2006) What issues would you be concerned about? Why? What criteria for secure accommodation are/might be met? How would you prioritise these cases?

15. Stages of placement in secure accommodation Pre-admission Admission Stay in care Through care After care

16. Maintaining a sense of purpose Assessment - needs to deal with behaviour and difficulties that led to placement in secure accommodation Care plan - Nat Stds call for action plan after 10 days Programme Reassessment/Monitoring

17. Working in secure accommodation

18. The potential of secure accommodation The power of relationships relationship factors (the strength of the alliance that develops between the youth and the worker, built upon perceived empathy, acceptance, warmth, trust and self-expression and defined by the youth as a helpful connection) and the ability of workers to work positively with the clients’ ways of understanding themselves and others, account for 70% of behaviour change (Clark, 2001). Two other factors, hope and expectancy that change will occur, account for 15% of behaviour change (and also depend on a positive relationship between worker and youth); while intervention model and technique account for only 15%. Fundamental to any prevention or intervention that has a chance of success, is a strong positive relationship. (Nicholson & Artz, 2003, p. 41-42) From ‘what works’ to ‘who works’

19. Moving on ‘wash-out’ effect National standards Every young person will have an aftercare plan covering a period of at least 3 months following the day of departure from secure accommodation. New units secure/open campuses Working with families

20. Exercise Pick one of the vignettes. Identify some key care planning objectives

21. Recent research In Scotland - Role and Relationship with ‘alternative’ services No direct alternative (difficulty finding sample) Complimentary rather than alternative Successful in keeping safe, health, but… ‘wash-out’ Even so, half maintain improvements over 2/3 years Local, small scale and relationally based provision better Relationships… England The use by local authorities of secure children’s homes Declining use of secure as welfare resources Alternatives can be more expensive

22. Conceptualising secure accommodation Any group care centre has in various ways to incorporate aspects of treatment, teaching, nurturance and control according to the specific needs of the children referred there. Yet experience has shown that the ethos of most group care centres is heavily dominated by the single yet simplistic purpose that underpins the resource system sponsoring a centre. This often results in the overall developmental needs of children being overwhelmed by a single purpose, which although important is an incomplete response at best. Fulcher and Ainsworth 1985

23. Further reading A full account of policy and practice issues relating to secure accommodation including extensive further reading can be found in Smith, M (ed) 2005 Secure in the Knowledge available on the SIRCC website www.sircc.strath.ac.uk/publications/publicationsdownloads.html. Harris, R. & Timms, N. (1993). Secure accommodation in child care: between hospital and prison or thereabouts. London: Routledge.

24. Further reading (continued) Goldson, B. (2002). Vulnerable inside: children in secure and penal settings. London: The Children's Society. Goldson (2002) New Labour, Social Justice and Children: Political Calculation and the Deserving-Undeserving Schism British Journal of Social Work 32 683-695 O’Neill, Teresa. (2001). Children in secure accommodation: a gendered exploration of locked institutional care for children in trouble. London: Jessica Kingsley McNeill, F and Batchelor S (2004) Persistent Offending by Young People: Developing Practice Issues in Community and Criminal Justice Monograph 3 London: National Association of Probation Officers McNeill, F Batchelor, S. Burnett, R. Knox, J 21 st Century Social Work: Reducing Re-offending: Key Practice Skills http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2005/04/21132007/20080

25. Further Reading (Cont) Milligan, I. and Smith M. (2006) From welfare to correction: A review of changing discourses of secure accommodation Educational and Child Psychology 23 (2) 75-87 (on webCT) Pitts J (2005) The Dismal state of the Secure Estate in Crimmens D and Milligan I. Facing Forward Russell House Publishing Scottish Executive (2006) Secure Accommodation in Scotland: its role and relationship with ‘alternative’ services www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/09/01153312/0 Scottish Executive statistics www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/08/31160332/1 Smith, M. and Milligan, I. (2005) The expansion of secure care places in Scotland: in the best interests of the child? Youth Justice 4(3) 178 – 191